Search results

The examination researches the impacts of cultural identity on entrepreneurial performance in the southern Nigeria. The examination connected a cross-sectional overview approach in choosing the small- and medium-scale enterprises (SMEs) in south-south district who reacted to an organized poll. The Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient and structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM 3.2) were utilized in analyzing. The examinations show that there is an association between family structure, communal spirit and entrepreneurial performance. Nevertheless, there is a weak connection among individualism orientation, profitability and survival. The examination reasoned that SMEs could raise performance by embracing significant antecedents of cultural identity from successful cultural groups.

In this paper, we consider the ways that global leaders can promote global learning in their companies. Global learning occurs when ideas cross organizational boundaries, so that managers in all parts of the company can learn from each other. Through global learning, effective business practices can be identified and spread across the company, insuring that good ideas are adopted, regardless of their origin. These ideas become “global best practices” when they define an idea that can be applied globally, with some local modification if required.

In the first section, we ask four questions to help you determine if your company is prepared for global learning. Answering “yes” means that your company has a global orientation, which provides the foundation for global learning. Second, we present a model of global learning. Third, we suggest ways that you can build the capacity for global learning in your own company.

The seven papers in Part II all focus on the practice of global leadership. Compared to those in Part I, these chapters focus more on practical solutions to the problems that leaders face than the analysis of fundamental processes, although this distinction is one of the degree. All the authors in Part I explore the practical implications of their ideas, and those in Part II contribute to the development of fundamental concepts. Thus, it is the relative emphasis on foundations versus application that distinguishes Parts I and II.

Cultural visibility is closely linked to physical and social mobility, and access to – or denial of – free movement through private and public spaces powerfully shapes individual and social identities. As Liam Kennedy has shown in the context of urban space, “the operations of power are everywhere evident in space: space is hierarchical – zoned, segregated, gated – and encodes both freedoms and restrictions – of mobility, of access, of vision” (2000, pp. 169–170). A consideration of how film articulates a relationship between space and identity might thus begin by breaking down the concept of space itself into three distinct yet interconnected areas of analysis: first, the notion of socially produced space, as shown in the work of Henri Lefebvre and others; second, the idea of audience space or the architectural space of the theater; and finally, the theory of film space or the space of the screen. Given this essay’s limited scope, the latter will be examined in more detail than the first two, but I would like to stress the underlying interconnectedness of the three. While, for example, formalist studies of film aesthetics may be just as valuable as in-depth studies of changing viewing habits, audience demographics, and exhibition technologies, film interpretation should strive to keep in view the variety of spatial formations and conditions that might come to bear on any particular visual text.